Researching Cyberbullying In Youth Mental Health and Working Towards Holistic Interventions

Research shows cyberbullying has a negative effect on adolescents’ mental health causing emotional, social, and physical consequences (Sheanoda & Bussey, 2021). While definitions of cyberbullying vary, the most common is “any behaviour performed through electronic or digital media by individuals or groups that repeatedly communicates hostile or aggressive messages intended to inflict harm or discomfort on others” (Fermani et al., 2021). Due to the covert nature of cyberbullying, quantifying prevalence rates is difficult. This is due to adolescents internalising emotions/trauma, thus hindering the opportunity for self-disclosure as a viable research tool (Fermani et al., 2021). It is this internalisation of trauma that guides the approach toward applying social cognitive theories and systems theories.

Ecological Systems theories view individuals and groups as a larger part of an interconnected network, incorporating personal, family, friends, and society. It provides an understanding of how an individual’s problems may be influenced by issues at home, at school and/or in the community. In relation to cyberbullying, Patel et al. (2024) found the interaction between individuals and their social contexts was largely influenced by the quality and amount of social support available in the school, home and community settings.

A recent US government report on social media and youth mental health (US Surgeon General’s Advisory, 2023) found up to 95 per cent of young people aged 13–17 report using a social media platform, with girls more likely to be cyber victims and boys three and a half times more likely to be cyberbullies (p. 6). A longitudinal cohort study also done in the US found 12-15 year-olds who spent more than three hours per day on social media were at double the risk of experiencing poor mental health issues, such as anxiety and depression (the US Surgeon General’s Advisory, 2023). Sheanoda & Bussey’s research (2016) also confirmed the correlation between cyberbullying and young people’s mental health; being associated with depression, stress, extreme sadness, loneliness, and social anxiety.

Data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS, 2020) found 96 per cent of 9–11 year-olds and 98 per cent of 12–14 year-olds were accessing the internet at home or at school with over 70 per cent of children aged 12–14 owning their own mobile phone (Cross et al., 2016). A study of secondary students in Victoria found approximately 12 per cent of 14 to15-year-old students reported cyberbullying others and around 13 per cent reported cyberbullying victimisation during the previous 12 months (Hemphill, Tollit & Kotevski, 2012).

Research by Hemphill and Heerde (2014) identifies a range of risk factors associated with bullying and cyberbullying. Prior exposure to bullying can increase vulnerability and may be addressed through narrative therapy. High frequency and duration of online activity also heighten exposure to harmful interactions. A poor parent–child relationship is another key factor, best understood through Attachment Theory and Ecological Systems Theory (EST), which also help explain the impact of low parental support and family conflict. Negative self-concept, poor social skills, and low social competence are linked to increased bullying involvement and can be supported through Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT). Protective factors include strong emotional regulation, which aligns with strengths-based approaches, and a strong connection with school, which is considered a buffer against bullying under EST. Additionally, poor academic performance and ineffective family management—such as lack of rules or supervision—are also associated with increased risk of bullying behaviour.

With a large percentage of minors, 9 to 14 years old, accessing the internet, it does not seem appropriate to apply sociological penology theories to those classified as underage. Some adolescents may lack insight into how their behaviour has a detrimental impact on others, or the awareness of what they are doing is illegal in Australia. Applying certain theoretical frameworks to adolescent behaviour may inadvertently lead to the criminalisation of youths who, due to developmental immaturity and limited impulse control, may not fully comprehend the severity or consequences of their actions. Mercurio and Mercurio (2020) confirm developmental immaturity impacts adolescent behaviour and legal responsibility.

The Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) posits that individual behaviour is guided by rational decision-making based on personal attitudes, beliefs, intentions, and perceptions of social norms (Fermani et al., 2021). While this model offers a structured lens for understanding adult behaviour, it fails to adequately account for the developmental and environmental complexities unique to adolescence. TRA assumes that individuals behave in line with deliberate, logical reasoning (Nickerson, 2023); however, this premise is fundamentally incompatible with current developmental psychology. Empirical evidence underscores that the adolescent brain—particularly the prefrontal cortex and amygdala—which are responsible for impulse control, emotional regulation, and executive functioning—is still undergoing significant maturation (Steinberg, 2020). As a result, adolescents are more susceptible to reactive, emotionally charged behaviour and less likely to engage in the type of rational deliberation that TRA presumes.

Moreover, the TRA’s narrow focus on individual cognition neglects the broader social, familial, and digital ecosystems that profoundly shape adolescent behaviour. Ecological and systems-based theories better capture the influence of peer dynamics, parental relationships, school environments, and online culture—factors that are particularly salient in cyberbullying contexts. As Steinberg (2014) states, the adolescent brain is “under construction”, highlighting the fluid and reactive nature of adolescent decision-making. Given this developmental context, it is both theoretically and ethically problematic to apply a model grounded in adult rationality to adolescent cyberbullying. More holistic, developmentally appropriate frameworks are needed to understand and intervene effectively in this space.

Hutson et al. (2018) conducted a systematic review of 17 cyberbullying intervention programs implemented in primary and secondary school settings across 11 countries and four continents. The majority of these programs were designed to target individual-level behaviours by promoting digital citizenship, educating students about the consequences of cyberbullying, and enhancing coping strategies, communication skills, and empathy. Notably, fewer than half of the interventions included parental involvement, which may represent a significant limitation. Given that cyberbullying often occurs at home while adolescents are accessing digital technologies, parental engagement is essential. Parents play a critical role in monitoring online activity, establishing boundaries through parental controls, and fostering open communication about digital behaviour. This aligns with findings from Office of the eSafety Commissioner (2021), which reported that 43 per cent of young people would turn to their parents or friends for support following a negative online experience. Importantly, Hutson et al. (2018) concluded that whole-school approaches were more effective in reducing cyberbullying than interventions targeting individual students alone.

A whole-school intervention was effectively implemented in a Western Australian secondary school as part of the Cyber Friendly Schools (CFS) program, which aimed to reduce cyberbullying through coordinated, multi-level strategies (Cross et al., 2016). The program adopted an ecological framework, incorporating interventions at the micro-, meso-, and exosystem levels. At the micro level, initiatives focused on enhancing social relationships, fostering peer support, and building student resilience. At the mesosystem level, the program strengthened school–family–community partnerships and promoted consistent behavioural expectations across settings. Exosystem-level strategies included the development of clear school policies related to cyberbullying and the use of positive behaviour management practices. The program was longitudinally evaluated over a two-year period, with results showing significant reductions in both cyberbullying perpetration and victimisation. For example, students in the intervention schools reported a 6 per cent decrease in experiences of cybervictimisation compared to students in the control group. These findings provide strong evidence for the effectiveness of whole-school, system-based interventions in addressing adolescent cyberbullying.

Adolescents who have been subjected to cyberbullying—particularly those who have experienced behaviours such as "tricky", outing, or exclusion—may present with feelings of vulnerability, anxiety, and betrayal. Therefore, early therapeutic sessions should prioritise the development of rapport, empathetic understanding, and a sense of psychological safety. This can be facilitated through a welcoming counselling environment, characterised by the counsellor’s use of positive body language, minimal encouragers, verbal underlining, and reflective listening, all of which contribute to building trust and engagement with the young person.

In subsequent therapeutic sessions, the counsellor should use both open and closed questioning techniques to encourage the young person to articulate their experiences of cybervictimisation and explore how these events have affected various aspects of their microsystem. Observational skills are equally important during this stage, as non-verbal cues such as body language can offer valuable insight into the adolescent’s emotional state and help determine the appropriate pace for therapeutic progression.

Group-based activities designed to enhance peer support, empathy, and communication skills.
Classroom interventions that focus on building digital citizenship, social skills, resilience, conflict resolution, coping strategies, and empathy.
Whole-school information sessions, delivered by year level, aimed at increasing awareness among students and staff regarding the mental health risks associated with cyberbullying and the broader dangers of information and communication technologies (ICTs).
Guest speakers, such as representatives from the eSafety Commissioner and the ThinkUKnow program, who can provide expert guidance on cybersafety and digital behaviours.
Improved communication strategies to facilitate information-sharing and issue discussion between key stakeholders, including parents/guardians, teachers, and students.
Community-based education initiatives, such as parent sessions focused on cybersafety, the importance of internet controls, and parental supervision of ICT use at home.

There is a significant gap in the literature regarding the mental health impacts of cyberbullying on minority populations, including Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and individuals identifying as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, or intersex (LGBTQI+). Existing data from the eSafety Commissioner (2023) indicate that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander youth are disproportionately affected, being three times more likely than their non-Indigenous peers to experience online hate speech, discrimination, and bullying.

Ecological Systems Theory offers a useful framework for supporting the social and emotional wellbeing of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander youth by recognising the interconnected influence of their environment. The theory aligns well with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander worldviews by acknowledging the importance of the microsystem (family, siblings, peers), exosystem (elders, neighbours), and macrosystem (cultural heritage, historical context, and social conditions). A systemic approach to social and emotional wellbeing has the potential to mitigate some of the negative impacts of cyberbullying. Research from the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (2018) highlights that "a strong cultural identity can protect young Indigenous people against challenges to their social and emotional wellbeing".

One culturally sensitive tool that may enhance understanding of a young person’s microsystem is the generational story map, which allows for indirect exploration of relational dynamics in a way that is less confronting than traditional questioning. Additionally, unique strengths in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities are evident in how parents and elders often actively engage with youth in digital environments—co-participating in online activities and promoting digital learning. According to the eSafety Commissioner (2023), shared digital experiences and open communication about online activity can serve as protective factors for youth mental health.

However, it is important to acknowledge the limitations of Ecological Systems Theory in this context. Critics argue that the theory does not fully account for the deep human–nature relationships central to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander culture (Elliott & Davis, 2018). Connection to land is not only spiritual but fundamental to wellbeing. The forced disconnection from land through colonisation is widely understood to have contributed to the intergenerational trauma and mental health challenges experienced by many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people today.

Further research is warranted to explore how culturally and linguistically diverse populations, as well as other minority groups, perceive the impact of online communication on the mental health of their young people. Comparative studies may provide valuable insight into how these communities manage online risks across various ecological domains, including the immediate and extended family, school environment, and broader community. Additionally, identifying the protective behaviours and culturally grounded strategies that are already proving effective within these groups may inform the development of more inclusive and contextually relevant interventions.